The waltz of statuses

The APROFED association is back with you this week with a historical reminder of the many statuses proposed during the events of the 1980s that seem to be happening again today, 40 years later.

In the 1980s, New Caledonia actually experienced a rapid succession of statuses proposed by the French State , in a context of strong political tensions and demands for independence.

The first of these, in September 84, named Lemoine , after the Minister of Overseas Territories at the time, provided for a division of the territory into three regions (North, Center, South), with broad powers (education, local economy, culture), the establishment of a Territorial Congress bringing together elected representatives from the regions and a gradual transfer of powers to these regions. Paris retained the sovereign powers (defense, currency, justice). This was nevertheless rejected by the FLNKS, which judged that it did not respond to the demand for independence and boycotted the planned elections, leading to an insurrection on the part of the Kanak (blockades, armed clashes).

Faced with the rise in violence, a second political status was proposed a year later in August 1985, named Pisani , after the Minister Delegate in charge of New Caledonia appointed by François Mitterrand. This status confirmed the 3 regions as well as the Congress previously proposed by Lemoine with a desire to give more weight to the Kanaks in local management with the establishment of a collegiate executive and the transfer of all powers to the territory except for sovereign ones. If the Lemoine status could be likened to a kind of federalism, that of Pisani was equivalent, according to some, to a more advanced status of the protectorate type. With this new status appeared the term independence-association . If the reception of the FLNKS was more favorable, it was the loyalists who opposed it , denouncing an abandonment on the part of the State of New Caledonia. The clashes between communities continued and the plan was abandoned by the President of the Republic.

Laurent Fabius then became Prime Minister and attempted to adapt Pisani’s plan, which would become known as the Fabius-Pisani status . This status provided for the retention of the regions and Congress, but with more financial resources. An attempt to bring the two camps together through institutional reforms was undertaken, with the idea of ​​a referendum on self-determination, to be held after a period to be defined. The FLNKS participated but wanted a rapid referendum . Anti-independence activists opposed any prospect of independence . This transitional status resolved nothing, and violence continued. Clashes and boycotts made implementation impossible.

In July 1986, a political change occurred. Jacques Chirac became Prime Minister and appointed Bernard Pons, Minister of Overseas Territories. A clear change of direction took place with a desire to reduce the influence of the FLNKS and reestablish a centralized authority. Regionalization was abandoned, deemed too favorable to the FLNKS. Provinces were created but with reduced powers (simple decentralization). A desire to reduce the influence of independence and reaffirm French unity was put forward. The FLNKS denounced a step backward. Clashes intensified in the North and in the Loyalty Islands . The status did not calm the situation.

In 1987 , as the crisis dragged on, a PONS II statute was implemented, which provided for a self-determination vote on September 13, 1987, with the choice between independence or remaining in the Republic . The FLNKS boycotted the vote, denouncing an electorate that was too large (because it included recently installed metropolitan residents). Result: 98.3% in favor of remaining in France, but with a massive abstention from the independence movement. The vote did not resolve anything, and the violence escalated, culminating in the hostage-taking of gendarmes in April 1988 on Ouvéa , leading the State to validate the intervention of the army, resulting in several dozen deaths.

This tragedy led to a new approach. Following this, we entered a new phase with the Matignon Accords (1988) and Noumea Accords (1998),  which marked the end of this series of statuses imposed unilaterally by the State without any real consensus.

While Jean-Marie Tjibaou had repeatedly spoken out in favor of the various proposed statuses, as historian David Chappell recalls in his book the Kanak awakening, the FLNKS, for its part, always spoke out against them due to their overly open electoral body. This was indeed a 6-month residency period under the Lemoine status, 3 years under the Pisani status, then a 10-year sliding period under the Matignon and Nouméa accords, finally being frozen in the early 2000s and allowing for relative peace until 2024 when the State, along with local non-independence supporters, chose to unfreeze this electoral body, provoking a new insurrection and a return 40 years in the past.

The association lets you notice the similarity of the statutes proposed today and those of the 80s demonstrating the same problems, the same solutions provided and resulting reactions. The Lepredour format resembling the Lemoine method leading like this to the insurrection of 2024, the proposal of independence-association proposed during the Conclave of Deva in 2025 by Minister Valls resembling that of Pisani in 1985 and today Bougival rejected by the FLNKS which seems to be for the latter a step backwards as was the PONS statute in 1986-1987.

Let us hope that the beginning of 2026 does not correspond to the disastrous year of 1988 with a boycott by the independence supporters of the Bougival project which should normally be submitted to the population at the beginning of the year by referendum.

This is why the association renews its call for the State to transfer, like diplomatic relations, justice and internal security to New Caledonia for the powers that are specific to it, with a view to obtaining a fair sharing of sovereign powers and allowing the territory to acquire shared sovereignty, which we called “small independence”, with a new date of self-determination for 2053.

The association is surprised that the State is not applying this middle ground since, as Manuel Valls pointed out, the status that will apply to New Caledonia will only apply to it. Other overseas and metropolitan communities will not be able to benefit from it.

We wish you a good read and remind you that federalism is the only solution to reconcile unity in diversity.